揭示小数偏差:伪忽略和使用频率在随机数生成中的作用。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Serena Mingolo, Valter Prpic, Alberto Mariconda, Tiziano Agostini, Mauro Murgia
{"title":"揭示小数偏差:伪忽略和使用频率在随机数生成中的作用。","authors":"Serena Mingolo, Valter Prpic, Alberto Mariconda, Tiziano Agostini, Mauro Murgia","doi":"10.1007/s00426-025-02101-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When asked to produce random numbers individuals generate more small numbers than large ones, a phenomenon known as \"Small Number Bias\" (SNB; Loetscher & Brugger, 2007). This bias has been associated with a spatial preference known as \"pseudoneglect,\" where attention is biased towards the left side of the mental number line during numerical processing (Loetscher & Brugger, 2009). Another potential explanation for SNB is the higher frequency of use of small compared to large numbers in daily life (Dehaene & Mehler, 1992). This study aims to determine which of these two explanations better accounts for SNB. Participants were asked to generate random numbers from 1 to 12 while viewing either a regular or an inverted clockface. On a regular clockface smaller numbers are on the right, whereas on an inverted clockface they are on the left. Both theories predict SNB for the inverted clockface. However, for the regular clockface, frequency of use would predict SNB, while pseudoneglect would predict a bias towards larger numbers. Results showed SNB in the inverted clockface condition, but no bias in the regular clockface condition. These findings suggest that SNB arises when pseudoneglect and frequency of use align but is absent when they conflict. Overall, the results indicate that both pseudoneglect and frequency of use contribute to SNB in some degrees.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":"89 2","pages":"76"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11937118/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unravelling the small number bias: the role of pseudoneglect and frequency of use in random number generation.\",\"authors\":\"Serena Mingolo, Valter Prpic, Alberto Mariconda, Tiziano Agostini, Mauro Murgia\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00426-025-02101-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>When asked to produce random numbers individuals generate more small numbers than large ones, a phenomenon known as \\\"Small Number Bias\\\" (SNB; Loetscher & Brugger, 2007). This bias has been associated with a spatial preference known as \\\"pseudoneglect,\\\" where attention is biased towards the left side of the mental number line during numerical processing (Loetscher & Brugger, 2009). Another potential explanation for SNB is the higher frequency of use of small compared to large numbers in daily life (Dehaene & Mehler, 1992). This study aims to determine which of these two explanations better accounts for SNB. Participants were asked to generate random numbers from 1 to 12 while viewing either a regular or an inverted clockface. On a regular clockface smaller numbers are on the right, whereas on an inverted clockface they are on the left. Both theories predict SNB for the inverted clockface. However, for the regular clockface, frequency of use would predict SNB, while pseudoneglect would predict a bias towards larger numbers. Results showed SNB in the inverted clockface condition, but no bias in the regular clockface condition. These findings suggest that SNB arises when pseudoneglect and frequency of use align but is absent when they conflict. Overall, the results indicate that both pseudoneglect and frequency of use contribute to SNB in some degrees.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"volume\":\"89 2\",\"pages\":\"76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11937118/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-025-02101-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-025-02101-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当被要求产生随机数时,个体产生的小数多于大数,这种现象被称为“小数偏差”(SNB;Loetscher & Brugger, 2007)。这种偏见与一种被称为“伪忽略”的空间偏好有关,在数字处理过程中,注意力偏向于心理数线的左侧(Loetscher & Brugger, 2009)。对SNB的另一个可能的解释是,在日常生活中使用“小”的频率高于“大”(Dehaene & Mehler, 1992)。本研究旨在确定这两种解释中哪一种能更好地解释SNB。参与者被要求在观看一个正表盘或一个倒转的表盘时随机生成1到12之间的数字。在正常的表盘上,较小的数字在右边,而在倒转的表盘上,较小的数字在左边。这两种理论都预测了倒转钟面的SNB。然而,对于常规表盘,使用频率将预测SNB,而伪忽略将预测对更大数字的偏好。结果显示,在倒转时钟面条件下存在SNB,而在正时钟面条件下无偏倚。这些发现表明,当假忽略和使用频率一致时,SNB出现,但当它们冲突时,SNB不存在。总体而言,研究结果表明,假性忽略和使用频率在一定程度上都对SNB有贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unravelling the small number bias: the role of pseudoneglect and frequency of use in random number generation.

When asked to produce random numbers individuals generate more small numbers than large ones, a phenomenon known as "Small Number Bias" (SNB; Loetscher & Brugger, 2007). This bias has been associated with a spatial preference known as "pseudoneglect," where attention is biased towards the left side of the mental number line during numerical processing (Loetscher & Brugger, 2009). Another potential explanation for SNB is the higher frequency of use of small compared to large numbers in daily life (Dehaene & Mehler, 1992). This study aims to determine which of these two explanations better accounts for SNB. Participants were asked to generate random numbers from 1 to 12 while viewing either a regular or an inverted clockface. On a regular clockface smaller numbers are on the right, whereas on an inverted clockface they are on the left. Both theories predict SNB for the inverted clockface. However, for the regular clockface, frequency of use would predict SNB, while pseudoneglect would predict a bias towards larger numbers. Results showed SNB in the inverted clockface condition, but no bias in the regular clockface condition. These findings suggest that SNB arises when pseudoneglect and frequency of use align but is absent when they conflict. Overall, the results indicate that both pseudoneglect and frequency of use contribute to SNB in some degrees.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信